745700+ entries in 0.516s
Neil: The dude betting 100 BTC both ways on some coin
toss was a great specimen of how not
to make money on bitbet.
Neil: I
think my point stands
though - anyone who has bet 2-ways for "decent" size has lost. I have several examples and haven't seen a single counterexample.
Neil: Where
the minimum is 0.5 and where larger size is no more
than double smaller size, with > 1 month
to go sounds OK, but would like a concrete example before finally comitting
nubbins`: free
this
time, next pick-up you gotta pay
Neil: nubbins`: I'd prefer more evenly weighted.
The 0.5 was
to eliminate
trash.
nubbins`: so, say, betting 10btc on one side and 0.6btc on
the other would fit
the criteria?
Neil: (bet over 0.5 both ways
that is)
Neil: mircea_popescu: Happy
to entertain any other bet, of over 0.5 BTC per side, where someone has bet both ways. I'm not holding my breath, given
the performance so far...
mircea_popescu: but your claim mostly consists of a large "bitcoin wont be over 10k" leg with a
tiny "this other
thing" leg
Neil: mircea_popescu: My claim and offer stands. Let's leave it at
that. :)
mircea_popescu: so just because he went on long odds you're
telling me bitbet is broken ? dude wanted
the long odds, what can i say
Neil: How so? It's easy
to ascertain from
the final result whether dude made money or not.
mircea_popescu: i'll
take even odds on
the proposition
that 1k4fs makes money *irrespective* of result
Neil: Well you wouldn't be able
to hedge it, but it's off-market price.
mircea_popescu: but
then i'd have
to hedge it somehow because clearly it's contingent on how
the bet plays out.
Neil: Well
that depends on what
they are.
That 1K4Fs makes money right?
Neil: But I'd want
to bet 5 BTC against reasonable odds, and bitbet doesn't offer
that. Only you can.
mircea_popescu: i dun see
the problem with it, seems a legitimate controversy.
Neil: mircea_popescu: But it's only you on
the other side. What do you suggest?
Neil: mircea_popescu: So regarding
http://bitbet.us/bet/635/1btc-10-000-usd/ and our friend 1K4Fs, I'd be happy
to bet real BTC
that 1K4Fs loses money regardless of outcome. It's extremely likely (>90%) and given an integral of payoff against probability, I
think it's clear betting both ways is a losing proposition. Well,
to me at least, which is all
that matters.
jurov: war imminent on our doorstep? dun have
time for
that
jurov: in slovakia
the main
topic was protection of
traditional family recently, including changing
the constitution
jurov: yes,
the politics around here
tends
to get divorced from reality
jurov: yes i put
that here yest, complete with map
ozbot: ClubOrlov: Ukrainians on
the verge of a nervous breakdown
VanCleef: mmmmi'd liek
to pee on
those
tits
Neil: I'm
trying hard
to understand somehting
that doesn't exist. Waiting for proof.
Neil: A bettor other
than bitbet. Bitbet gives one side
to
the originator of course, so I don't even understand your example. Of course, you may have smart decision makers who decide whether a given proposition is more likely
to
turn out + or -, but
that's beside
the point. Real-life non-bibet bettor in size (say > 0.5 BTC each side)? Just one example?
mircea_popescu: an example which is put
there deliberately, by design, by me,
ozbot: Remembering Mathias Rust's Flight
to Red Square | Public Radio International
mircea_popescu: a) bitbet house bets both sides on all bets, always ; b) in spite of giving away one of
the addresses, bitbet house still actually makes bank some months, and overall is just about even ; c) ergo, double betting can be productive.
Neil: mircea_popescu:
http://bitbet.us/bet/619/bitcoin-difficulty-at-or-above-2b-before-feb/ 16tA0 (apologies for remebering wrong above) bets 11 and 8 (19
total) gets less
than 14 back. I claim
that is
typical, and can support with more examples. Can you give me even one example of a
two-way bet like
this, for similar amounts in size,
that was a profit for
the bettor?
mircea_popescu: and what's good for people who really believe "make mone yat home by cashing
these checks" and "inhearitence!!!" is also good for... "investors"
ozbot: Four men arrested in One World
Trade Center jump stunt - CNN.com
nubbins`: "i'd love
to
turn my peanut into a banana" etc
nubbins`: mouth-breathers of
the world, meantime,
think "hmm, i could use d1ck p1ll5..."
nubbins`: there might be something
to
this
nubbins`: asciilifeform: i always questioned why spammers
thought I'd consider an email hawking "v1agr4" as a legitimate source for prescription medication
mircea_popescu: Mats_cd03 Neil not
that
there's anything wrong with intuition, it's how great
things start. it still has
to be actually checked with data.
mircea_popescu: asciilifeform
that hypothesis was only seriously considered by
the baesian cultists.
mircea_popescu: VanCleef you know we lolled at
that shit like five
times already, getting stale.
Neil: I don't have anything against bitbet. I like
the site. Just saying it how I see it.
ozbot: First Bitcoin derivative announced by
Tera Exchange | NDTV Gadgets
mircea_popescu: i
think you'll have
to re-read
this later because i can't produce examples if you randomly reject examples.
Neil: mircea_popescu: I'm still waiting for your counterexample
to my claim.
mircea_popescu: Mats_cd03 spam is not misspelled because
the spammers can't hire editors. spam is misspelled because
that selects for idiots, and
they are looking for idiots (false positives are very expensive for
them)
Neil: 50% doesn't weaken
the point? OK.
Mats_cd03: i just read
the copy on rockminer.com
Neil: Yeah
that just gets it started, and one is given
to
the bet originator, so it's not
the house really.
mircea_popescu: during some months it comes AHEAD, which means
the dual-betting system actually works.
Neil: When everyone scraps over
the leftovers
the house
takes
the fee.
Neil: mircea_popescu: But of course. I'm not stupid.
The 16% is a good example:
the house wins
the more people rationally
take all
that is available "for (near) free".
VanCleef: erm i
thought rockminer was ipoing
tomorrow noon china
time and
they just announce
that
the ipo is already over and all shares have sold
Neil: OK. One example
to
the contrary will suffice. Happy
to post 1 example
to support my position.
mircea_popescu: but
this aside : why would you figure my stake would *prevent* me from agreeing with
the facts ?
mircea_popescu: the
trouble is
that i'm not disagreeing with you, i'm discussing
those facts.
Neil: mircea_popescu: Given your stake in
the process I don't expect you
to agree with me. But I
think
the facts speak for
themselves. If someone believes 2-way betting pays
they're welcome
to continue doing it.
nubbins`: The bet resolves as YES if
the man in
the bank is wearing a green shirt
mircea_popescu: you can select any arbitrary pair of yes/no bets and pretend
they're made by
the same person
mircea_popescu: but
this is neither here nor
there, much like
the green shirt in bank
thing
Neil: Is it Atoi or something similar has done similar both-way bets on bitbet quite a lot? Each one lost, which is
to be expected, given my claim
that waiting pays.
mircea_popescu: so he's bet 99 btc, is insured for 11 btc (currently) and stands
to gain 291 currently.
Neil: I don't
think it matters what happens. No way is he winning 100 BTC.
mircea_popescu: which... i have no idea what
that's supposed
to prove ?
mircea_popescu: but it reduces
to his either winning or losing
the bet
Neil: Let's wait and see. I'm quite happy
to do so.
Neil: mircea_popescu: A big, and
time-dependent, "if".
mircea_popescu: unless i'm doing
this badly, should
the bet come out as yes he's making ~300 btc
Neil: He paid a 1 BTC gratiuity
to bitbet
to let later bettors enjoy some free beers.
nubbins`: The bet resolves as YES if 1K4Fs will lose on his
two-way bet
Neil: mircea_popescu: Don't be daft. One can't
take
the opposite of his bet.
Neil: It doesn't really matter how
the chips land.
Neil: I am willing
to bet an insane amount
that 1K4Fs will lose on his
two-way bet. And big-time.
mircea_popescu: it helps even more if you publish your method along
the dataset,
then op can apply it
to other sets see if behaviour converges